Captain Beefheart may be a genius, but his vocal stylings make Tom Waits sound like all the Beach Boys combined singing harmony. (and I don't hate some captain beefheart, but he was completely non commercial and barely rock).Not to say that Train is great. I almost never listen to the radio anymore so don't think I've even heard this song. But perhaps this is a bit of the wrath of the critics. They like to seek out the new "it" band that they can discover who is just avante garde enough to be cool. And Train, apparently, is too commercial. So therefore are uncool. yet, until the mid sixties a lot of rock was totally commercial. Woudn't these critics find such bands like the Beatles or Fats Domino to be similarly uncool? And why should rap or r&B similarly not face the critics scorn. In the top 100 is there any song on the R&B charts that would match a James Brown, or an Otis Redding or a Marvin Gaye or a Sam cooke? So then similarly, r&B is dead.

While I get where you're going (hipsters wouldn't dare diss black musicians), it's not true. I am quite certain that if you read the Village Voice during the period when crunk (a type of rap that's unironically about having a good time) was most popular, you would have seen the same kind of thing.

And R&B? Music critics are barely aware of its existence, and they rarely give it any coverage, positive or negative.

As I understand it, Rock and Roll is the music played by the black piano players in New Orleans whore houses trying to keep a happy mood going in a house of the rising sun milieux. It is slang for the sex act, which it accompanied. Elvis and Jerry lee Lewis brought it over to white culture, and then Chuck Berry perfected it.

One a positive note, how about the incredibly catchy rocker Darling Buds of May from soon-to-be-overhyped Britpop 2.0 hopefulls Brother? Awful band name tho, reminiscent of yet another crappy hippy group out of Portland.

traditionalguy said...Rock and Roll ended with Chuck Berry, and the rest are imitators.

================You hear the same irritating remark in any sport or art form or entertainment genre. Homage to some long-gone figure, assertion that everyone since is derivative, fraudent, a "mere imitator", a pale shadow of the Great Ur-Figure of the Genre.

All basketball is just imitators of Bill Russell.Nothing truly great and original has been done since Shakespeare closed the book (!) on writing.Every girl on ice skates since Sonja Henning is a pale shadow.How can you listen to any classic music written after the Great Masters of the 18th and 19th Century died?

I think that Rock has actually suffered from a fear of being derivative and a cabal of lawyer creeps tying to sue for anything they claim was "influenced" by some past artist.So now you get people that strive to be "original" over just being good and entertaining.

Growing up in the 70's and 80's, the self-centered Boomers would deride this new band or that with the common refrain, "will anyone even know who they are in 20 years?" To answer the "does anyone care about grunge" comment, it's almost 20 years later and some of the core "grunge" bands are still in heavy rotation, still sell extremely well, and are still named as huge influences on up and coming groups.

The early-to-mid 90's saw an explosion in extremely diverse and talented rock acts as alt-rock became mainstream...lol...as funny as that is to think.

As someone who was in the business, I say NewAge killed rock just as it's killing everything else. I can't tell you how often I had roadblocks put in my way, even when people thought I was a Lefty, because I wasn't "humble" in the Buddhist sense - and where, in this age of the Tea Party, are the conservatives? They can't get in. It's impossible. Music is locked up harder than Hollywood - much harder. NewAgers OWN it, like the Oprah Winfrey Network.

Alex wrote:Rock is something that was invented by The Beatles in 1966 when they first put a Rickenbacker bass on a record.

Only a lot of rock doesnt' use rickenbacker basses, so that really is a distinction that doesn't provide an actual answer.By the way, I just happened to see Rain on broadway, and the song Rain was noticably absent. Wtf?Why call it Rain if the song Rain isn't played?Also of note, the guy who plays Mccartney in the show is the same guy that did the fake WIngs song Love Take me Down from the Role Models movie. Got a great chuckle out of that.As to the play itself, it's not the Beatles, but they do a credible job of emulating them. It's harmless, but is essentially Beatlemania, and I didn't quite get the point of that either. Still, people seemed to like it a lot.

Rock n' Roll went to Europe with a hick name, and got back with a hip one-name label, just "Rock", like Madonna or Bono.

Alternatively, you can think of it as Barry Soetaro deciding to become Barrack H. Obama once he hit high school.

All that being said, most of what I used to listen to was properly speaking "rock". or prog-rock.

I'm fairly certain I haven't heard a single song written during 2010. Finally got around to listening to the whole of Goodbye Yellow Brick Road the other day, though... everything worth listening to had already been strip-mined for classic rock radio. Still half the record, but it wasn't exactly Highway 61 Revisited.

jr - my point is that in early '66 the Rickenbacker bass was a totally new sound in pop. Combine that with McCartney's lead style of bass playing and you had a totally new sound in pop. So much so that you had to start thinking of it as "rock". Genres started melting into each other in the middle 1960s...

Also on "Rain" Ringo Starr probably reaches the apex of his drumming. Then there is Lennon's backwards recorded vocals in the outro. Amazing stuff for early 1966.

What does that even mean? 1966 was the greatest year for rock/rock and roll. I'd like to see any other year go head-to-head with 1966 and win. To say pretty good for 1966 is ridiculous. It's like saying "pretty smart, for Einstein."

I still think that The Beatles "Revolver" is the best album of all time. It's the perfect fusion of pop/rock/chamber-pop and psychedelic experimentalism. All in a way that is totally accessible and cool.

What does that even mean? 1966 was the greatest year for rock/rock and roll. I'd like to see any other year go head-to-head with 1966 and win. To say pretty good for 1966 is ridiculous. It's like saying "pretty smart, for Einstein."

For rock, maybe, but, as I said, that's probably the year rock 'n' roll was murdered.

'57, '58 was it for rock 'n' roll. great stuff, incredibly dynamic - Buddy Holy, Elvis at his best, Chuck Berry, Fats Domino, the beginnings of the Drifters.

I don't give a shit what anybody else likes, calls rock, or thinks is better than something else. If I like it, I sure as hell ain't gonna let someone talk me out of it. I am the un-paralleled expert in all things that bagoh20 likes. Nobody here knows shit about that. If someone thinks something I like sucks, but thinks something else I like is genius, are they they an idiot, confused or just not me.

Nobody rocks bagoh20 like bagoh20. The dude is always right on about his music. IMHO.

Rock, rock-n-roll, etc, etc, nothing that has come out in a long time sees any type of rotation as 'classic rock' even today.

Have to tip my hat to those that mentioned Buddy Holly, Chick Berry, Elvis, 1966 and Revolver, definitely notable. And there's a lot more after that. The 80's was transitional as it saw more electronic gadgets and sampling which changed things.

One lead to another; every act that came 'on the scene' was influenced by earlier artists/successes.

This reminds me of my father telling me about Duke Ellington, etc. while I was listening to Buffalo Springfield, CSN, Floyd, Yes, etc.

Its relative and highly subjective. Share accordingly with an open mind.

Lady Gaga does nothing for me but my wife and daughter love the stuff.

1966: The Good, Bad, and the Ugly kicked everything else's butt. Released in '67, but made in '66.

I don't say that lightly. I'm X gen, but had fondness for things Beatle anyway.

Then a few years age, I watched "The Man With No Name" series when it was on TV- had never seen it before, only read the Hunter Thompson allusions. (I was a quite embarrassed about watching a Western, you know, until I got into it about the time Tuco killed his minder on the tracks and jumped back on the caboose to Morricone's Banshee-Hawk cries.

Then I did the numbers and it just amazed me that Eastwood must have been running around with that poncho for the first in the series (and already meditating btw) when the Beatles were still doing that embarrassing shakey head stuff on Ed Sullivan.

I got to the point that I chained the channel every time that song came on. What annoyed me most was the stretch to find a rhyme for "sister" and coming up with "Ain't that Mister Mister" I hadn't really noticed the fellatio metaphor, but as poetry it stinks. But then so do the lyrics of most pop music.

Another one that brings the hook our is "Little Lion Man" by Mumford and Sons.

And if Norah Jones' "Don't Know Why I Didn't Come" is about what I think, it's TMI.

As much as I like them, I had to take Radiohead's collection off my iPod because they ruin the flow of my shuffle - proof to me they haven't made a decent crossover song (something for everyone) in their entire career. And, if you think GaGa's doing good pop music, then you're merely a sycophant with no knowledge of (or concern for) the history of pop music. (Right now they're claiming Kanye West has the best album of the year - must've been a bad year!) Waaay better has been done, by way more people, than these losers will ever touch.

It's sad you don't know enough not to know that, but it also explains why bad shit is so prominent now. Some people will buy anything and then, because they bought it, declare it brilliant. It ain't:

You know, all those late 50s records are still there for your amusement. The rest of us are glad music evolved until we have now achieved Lady Gaga.

Gawd, you're an idiot - most people can't name one of her songs and have probably only heard a snippet of "Bad Romance" on the radio - which didn't make them run out and buy the album. I don't have one of her songs in my .mp3 collection and I own over 20,000 songs. I talk with artists, DJs, and musicians every day and her name only comes up as a joke.

bagoh20 said...I don't give a shit what anybody else likes, calls rock, or thinks is better than something else. If I like it, I sure as hell ain't gonna let someone talk me out of it. I am the un-paralleled expert in all things that bagoh20 likes. Nobody here knows shit about that. If someone thinks something I like sucks, but thinks something else I like is genius, are they they an idiot, confused or just not me.

Nobody rocks bagoh20 like bagoh20. The dude is always right on about his music. IMHO.

Talk to Alex - give him permission to repeat this speech, so he doesn't sound like an idiot, will you?

Rock, rock-n-roll, etc, etc, nothing that has come out in a long time sees any type of rotation as 'classic rock' even today.

Have to tip my hat to those that mentioned Buddy Holly, Chick Berry, Elvis, 1966 and Revolver, definitely notable. And there's a lot more after that. The 80's was transitional as it saw more electronic gadgets and sampling which changed things.

One lead to another; every act that came 'on the scene' was influenced by earlier artists/successes.

This reminds me of my father telling me about Duke Ellington, etc. while I was listening to Buffalo Springfield, CSN, Floyd, Yes, etc.

Its relative and highly subjective. Share accordingly with an open mind.

Lady Gaga does nothing for me but my wife and daughter love the stuff.

I agree with everything you've said except for the 'highly subjective" part - what you like is, but not where it fits in the musical canon.

My old man talked to me about music, too, but he was cool. I'd play him something new and he'd say, "We did that/that was done in 19-so-and-so" and then play me the recording that proved he was right. I got an outstanding musical education that way because we both wanted to hear everything the other had to offer - and my Dad(s) played with everybody. (I had a sister, Yonine Mingus.) The only artist I could bring my father that made him really sit up and pay attention was Zappa. (He said, "He plays serious music but he doesn't take himself seriously.") Zappa made him laugh.

As much as I like them, I had to take Radiohead's collection off my iPod because they ruin the flow of my shuffle - proof to me they haven't made a decent crossover song (something for everyone) in their entire career.

hate these yuppie douche bands that come off as bohemian hippy free-love douche nozzles that you have to pay a small mint to see like train and Dave Matthews Band and deal with the incessant New Age references to spirituality and the like. Give me a herioned up Miles Davis any day over this crap.

I was driving up to Vacaville from Pleasant Hill last to do some Christmas shopping and on the way up I was listening to a station, can't remember which and they were playing 50's music and had a spate of Buddy Holly and luckily I've got an app that can record whatever is on my radio and I replaying that Buddy Holly stuff and I swear to God I heard riffs that were as modern as today. It blew me away how great that was.